'•i'''^Ul^^,)^<'V-'i'-t'M''-'-'^^ 



Social Service Series 

THE 

ACCUMULATION 

OF WEALTH 

Gardner 



The Welfare of Each 
Is the Concern of AH 



,,i'0u0.i.!'4"- 



The Accumulation of 
Wealth 



C.'S. Gardner 

Professor of Homiletics and Sociology in the Southern 
Baptist Theological Seminary 




American Baptist Publication Society 

Philadelphia 
Boston Chicago St. Louis Toronto, Can. 



^^. 






Copyright 1916 by 
A. J. ROWLAND, Secretary 



Published Februarj', 1916 



P^ 



©CI.A428518 

APR 14 1916 



THE ACCUMULATION OF 
WEALTH 



Why do men accumulate wealth? I shall dismiss 
without consideration the motive of avarice. Some 
men become so perverted in their intellectual and 
moral processes that the mere possession of wealth 
is for them an absolute end in itself. With them 
wealth ceases to be a means, an instrumentality, and 
becomes an ultimate good. But I think that such 
men are comparatively few, and may be treated as a 
negligible quantity. Material wealth is a means to 
other ends, and is so considered by normal men. 
We speak of a " man of means." The phrase in- 
dicates that in the general thought the real good of 
wealth lies not in itself, but in that which it pro- 
cures or promotes. It has instrumental value only. 



What, then, are those ends which normally func- 
tion as motives in wealth accumulation? 

I. First, accumulation may have as a motive the 
desire to fortify one's self and one's loved ones 
against future want; a surplus is needed as a safe- 

3 



4 Social Service Series 

guard against unforeseen accidents, unexpected 
turns of the wheel of fortune, or against the bite of 
poverty in inevitable old age. Certainly, under the 
present economic system, the accumulation of a rea- 
sonable sum as an insurance against possible future 
want is entirely ethical ; indeed, is a social duty if 
it be done without interfering in any way with the 
privilege of others to do the same. Manifestly, 
however, this motive alone would stimulate one only 
to the laying up of a moderate surplus. Beyond a 
certain point all reasonable apprehension of future 
want for one's self or family disappears. The vast 
accumulations which are so characteristic a feature 
of our times cannot be attributed to this normal and 
entirely justifiable desire. 

2. Again, men are moved in much of their busi- 
ness activity by the desire to achieve, to do some- 
thing. It is a normal and healthy motive. It is a 
powerful incentive to activity along all lines — busi- 
ness, politics, art, literature, social reform, religion. 
It is doubtless less effective among " laboring men " 
than any other class of workers, not because they 
are less normal than others, but because the condi- 
tions under which they toil and the kind of work 
they have to do afford less scope for the satisfac- 
tion of the normal desire for distinctively personal 
achievement. But it is probably true that this mo- 
tive is more widely operative in stimulating activity 
in our present-day life than it ever has been before, 
because of the broader freedom of personality and 



The Accumulation of Wealth 5 

the wider scope for the putting forth of individual 
energies in creative action — boons which the demo- 
cratic movement has brought in greatly increased 
measure to all classes of men — with the exception 
of the " laborers," whose opportunities for per- 
sonal self-expression through their labor are nar- 
rowed by the vast extension of machine processes. 

This, however, while it is an extremely important 
incentive to activity in the economic as in all other 
spheres of life, is really of secondary importance as 
a motive to accumulation per se. It may be abun- 
dantly satisfied without the accumulation of wealth. 
It finds its satisfaction in creative activity itself. It 
stimulates to accumulation of wealth only when, 
under the influence of other motives, accumulation 
has been chosen as the end. If, for some other rea- 
son, a large fortune has been selected as the end of 
one's activities, it, of course, impels one toward its 
accomplishment. But it would be equally stimulating 
if some other end should be aimed at in economic 
activity. 

3. I shall pause only to mention a third motive 
which, without doubt, plays a large part in the lives 
of many business men — the love of the game. The 
gaming instinct is deep in us. It is, the psychologists 
tell us, the weakened survival of the habits of 
deadly conflict bred in man in the distant ages of 
his savage or primitive state. And when it is too 
powerfully stimulated it leads not to play, but to a 
revival, on the economic level, of the relentless strug- 



6 Social Service Series 

gles of that savage past. The sharp competition of 
business life affords it powerful stimulation and 
abundant opportunity; and it needs to be continu- 
ously held in check, lest it precipitate us into eco- 
nomic barbarism. All that is innocent in this motive 
may be brought into play without a mad rush for 
accumulation. 

4. A fourth motive is the desire for power. The 
possession of a large quantity of wealth has always 
given an individual great power over his fellow men ; 
but never was this so true as in the highly organized 
industrial society of our day. In the period which 
preceded the great industrial revolution, the men of 
wealth owned the greater part of the land, whence, 
in the last analysis, all must derive their living; but 
they did not own it all. There were communal lands, 
which the poor could use for their own benefit ; and 
the few and simple tools required for land cultiva- 
tion and manufacture were usually owned by the 
laborer. 

But, in the highly differentiated system of to-day, 
there are multitudes who own neither land nor tools 
and who sell their labor for a living. Over these the 
possession of large capital, either in the form of land 
or industrial plants, gives one extensive power — 
the power of the employer and of the landlord. If, 
through combination, the possessors of large wealth 
obtain, as they so often do, a practical monopoly of 
the production of some important kind of goods, 
they may, to a very large extent, control prices ; and 



The Accumulation of Wealth 7 

this gives them a far-reaching power over the pubHc 
at large. Whoever can, to any large extent, control 
the means of life exercises a sway over men as ef- 
fective and as absolute as the cruder forms of mili- 
tary or despotic power. Furthermore, since nearly 
all cultural institutions to-day need to be financed 
on a large scale, the possessors of large wealth have 
a control over the cultural — especially the religious 
and educational — life of the people, which is start- 
ling when one stops to measure its full significance. 

Nor is this all, by a great deal. Since many public 
servants are venal, since many who' are not directly 
venal have a wholesome fear of a power which 
reaches out in so many directions, since the press- — 
which usually requires large capital and therefore 
falls into the hands of those who have it — exercises 
so potent a sway over the public mind ; one may say, 
speaking conservatively, that the rich men exercise 
a control over public opinion, and especially over 
governmental activities, legislative, executive, and 
judicial, a thousandfold more potential than they are 
entitled to, simply on the ground of their intelli- 
gence and character. I do not in this connection 
emphasize the social menace involved in this situa- 
tion, but simply point out how potent a means the 
accumulation of wealth is for those who are actuated 
by the desire for power. More than anything else 
which a man can acquire, it places in his hands a 
direct, material, non-moral power over his fellow 
men. 



8 Social Service Series 

5. Another motive which plays a great role in 
the activities of men is the desire for distinction for 
one's self and one's family. Every man of normal 
constitution has it, and with many natures it is the 
transcendent motive force. It may be satisfied in 
many ways; but in the present economic organiza- 
tion of society no path leads so surely to this coveted 
goal as the accumulation of great wealth. Our 
standards of appreciation, developed on a basis of 
unregulated economic competition, cast a halo of 
social distinction around the heads of financial mag- 
nates. The possession of a large fortune lifts him 
and his family out of the ranks of " the people " ; it 
differentiates him from the common herd by the 
standard of living it enables him to maintain. To 
the unspiritual masses he is an object of envy; to 
growing youth, whose standards of life are formed 
in the atmosphere of the competitive struggle for 
material values, he is an ideal; to those who have 
an adequate sense of the power which he holds in 
his hands, he is an object of awe, which may be 
seasoned with reverence or despite, according to 
one's conception of his character. It inevitably 
gives him a kind of distinction which is most obvious 
to the perception of all men for the reason that 
it is based upon a material and not a spiritual foun- 
dation. 

The actual motive which In any given case impels 
to the accumulation of wealth is evidently not pos- 
sible to be determined by others, and doubtless is 



The Accumulation of Wealth 9 

often not clearly defined in the man's own conscious- 
ness ; but it is almost certain to be one or, more 
likely, a combination of some of those mentioned. 
All of these desires are, in themselves, honorable, 
and may be realized in harmony with the highest 
ethical standards; but the significant fact is that so 
many men are impelled by them in the direction of 
wealth-seeking; and the fact that so many seek the 
satisfaction of normal social desires in wealth-accu- 
mulation rather than by other means is due to the 
social environment in which they live and the ideals 
that are rooted in the present economic organiza- 
tion of society. The responsibility for this environ- 
ment, both in its material and moral aspects, rests 
upon us all. Our ideals act as a selective influence, 
developing and directing the activities of men along 
this line, bringing to the front and establishing in 
positions of power and distinction those who are 
expert in the arts of accumulation ; and the moral 
responsibility for the situation rests not alone upon 
them, but upon the community at large. 

II 

What are the methods by which large individual 
accumulations take place? Space will not permit 
detailed discussion. There are two general ways : 

I. The laying by of values created by individual 
efforts. There are three ways by which a man may 
create values by individual effort. First, he may, by 



/ Social Service Series 

the labor of his own hands, change material things 
into the forms in which men desire them. Secondly, 
he may bring objects of utility from places where 
they are not available to places where they are 
available, and thus add to their value. Thirdly, he 
may, by his intelligence, organize and direct the 
labor of others so as to make it more productive, 
and thus create value. 

2. Appropriating, by some arrangement or proc- 
ess, the values created by others. There are three 
ways in which this may be done — ways that are 
socially approved, at least not prohibited. First, he 
may inherit wealth which has been accumulated by 
his ancestors or relatives, wealth in the creation of 
which he had no part whatever. Secondly, he may 
receive the increase in the value of land which is 
due not to any labor of his own, but solely to the 
growth of the community — wealth which in the last 
analysis is produced indirectly by the activity of 
other people. Thirdly, he may be the possessor of 
capital, no matter how acquired, and employ labor- 
ers to whom he pays as wages less than the incre- 
ment of value which that labor actually creates. 
There is needed but a limited insight into the actual 
processes of modern industry to assure one that 
these methods of appropriating the values created by 
others have played a large part in the huge accumu- 
lations which are so striking a feature of the pres- 
ent situation. 

These methods of securing control of wealth 



The Accumulation of Wealth 1 1 

created by the labor of one's fellow men are all 
legitimate in the present organization of our eco- 
nomic system; and this economic organization has 
been considered the best practicable social policy 
and is supported by law. It is obvious, of course, 
that the appropriation by one of values created by 
others renders it impossible to assure to every one 
the possession of the values which he himself creates ; 
but, according to the social policy under which we 
live, this is regarded simply as one of the unavoid- 
able evils, due to the extreme difficulty of regulating 
our industrial relations and methods in such a way 
as to draw the line clearly between the wealth which 
one man produces and that which others produce. 
Production is, for the most part, social and not in- 
dividual. This is true not only of corporations, but 
of productive enterprises which are owned and ad- 
ministered by single individuals who employ labor. 
It is even true in many cases when the labor is not 
" employed," but is performed by the individual for 
himself; because in an increasing number of in- 
stances his labor does not create the whole, but only 
a portion of the total value. 

From this fact of collective production springs 
the fundamental difficulty in distribution. How can 
we tell, for instance, just what part of the total 
output of a factory is due to the labor of each of 
the many individuals who cooperated in the course 
of its production? But while production is, for the 
most part, cooperative, and while it is difficult to 



12 Social Service Series 

distinguish with any approach to accuracy just what 
each of the cooperating individuals contributed to 
the total value, that value is nevertheless divided 
and appropriated individually; and that division is 
made by whom? It is not made collectively by all 
those who cooperated in its creation. The division is 
made by the capitalist. The portions that go to 
those who do the manual labor and the manage- 
ment are paid them as wages and salaries by the 
capitalist, who takes the rest as dividends and 
profits, after the deduction of a sufficient amount 
for keeping the plant in order. 

My purpose is not to discuss all the implications 
of this inconsistency, but simply to point out the 
difficulty of an equitable division and the very great 
advantage which the capitalist, as the actual divider 
of the joint product, enjoys under the present sys- 
tem. The very difficulty of determining with accu- 
racy the share of the jointly created value which 
should be assigned to the cooperating individuals 
increases the opportunity of the capitalist to secure 
for himself an undue proportion. It is morally cer- 
tain that ordinarily under such an arrangement he 
will secure far more than his rightful share. It is 
difficult to avoid it, even when he is large-minded 
and benevolent, because the system lends itself so 
easily to it; and when he is not dominated by be- 
nevolent considerations, but is bent primarily upon 
large accumulation, we should not be surprised that 
flagrant injustice occurs. 



The Accumulation of Wealth 13 

If this is true in industrial operations, it is even 
more obvious that under our^system of land owner- 
ship there is a wholesale appropriation by individu- 
als of collectively created values. It is not easy, 
even in the matter of land values, to draw the line 
with certainty between that which is the result of 
one's own efforts and that which is the result of 
the work of others. But it is perfectly patent that 
the present land system lends itself most easily to 
the appropriation of wealth which the appropriators 
did not create. Sixty-five per cent of the million- 
aires in this country, it is declared on good author- 
ity, owe their fortunes more or less to increase in 
land values. 

If it be granted that our economic system is the 
best practicable one, the fact nevertheless stands 
out with boldness before all thoughtful eyes that 
the great individual accumulations of wealth consist 
in large part of values created by others. It is 
possible, of course, for a man, on grounds satisfac- 
tory to himself, to deny this and to justify his ap- 
propriation of a disproportionate share of jointly 
created wealth. Indeed, as things are, it is not easy 
to see how the appropriation of values created by 
others is to be altogether avoided. But an honest 
man who contemplates the matter conscientiously 
must feel disturbed by it, and is bound to avoid this 
inequity as far as it is practicable to do it ; and he 
will surely feel that those portions of his wealth 
which are not created by his own efforts have for 



14 Social Service Series 

him a different ethical significance from those por- 
tions which he himself has produced. If he is not 
deeply concerned as to the sources from which his 
wealth is accumulated, he exhibits a density of ig- 
norance and an obtuseness of perception which are 
deplorable and can hardly be innocent, or he dis- 
plays a moral insensibility which is wholly incon- 
sistent with a Christian standard of ethics. A 
healthy conscience does not rest easy in the sense of 
being the possessor of wealth created by others. 

The only exception is as to the wealth which one 
inherits ; and there is a growing uneasiness as to the 
ethical validity even of this. The right of inherit- 
ance had its origin assuredly in the primitive times 
when there was little personal responsibility, when 
the kinship group was the significant and responsi- 
ble social unit and the individual was merged in it. 
That conception was supreme in all ancient, and is 
yet in all backward, societies. It has prevailed until 
recent times in the more progressive societies, and 
recedes slowly before the advancing conception of 
the individual person as the significant and responsi- 
ble social unit — a conception which is pervasively 
and profoundly modifying ethical ideals in modern 
life. This tendency to place emphasis upon the in- 
dividual as the ultimate unit of social value, respon- 
sible primarily to society as a whole, is ever increas- 
ing in strength, and under its pressure the old notion 
of the kinship group as an economic social and re- 
ligious unity which persists from generation to gener- 



The Accumulation of Wealth 15 

ation is slowly disintegrating, and with it the notion 
that a man's children or nearest kin have a natural 
right, upon his decease, to take possession of the 
wealth which he has left. 

How far this development is to go we cannot say ; 
and there are differences of opinion as to whether 
it is a legitimate application of the Christian con- 
ception of man and society. The drift of enlight- 
ened opinion to-day is to discredit the conception 
of the kinship group as an economic unit which in- 
volves the natural right of inheritance, and to sub- 
stitute for it the individual standing in responsible 
relationship to the whole community. The right of 
inheritance is coming to be regarded as having a 
basis only in statutory law, as a social policy which 
can be justified only if it can be shown to be expedi- 
ent and conducive to justice in the general distribu- 
tion of wealth. The ethical validity of the right is, 
therefore, seriously challenged by many thinkers. 
The intelligent conscience of our time is looking 
with critical concern into this and into all the 
sources from which accumulations of wealth arise; 
and herein lies one of the chief causes of the social 
unrest which is so pronounced a feature of present- 
day life. No man who is engaged in the accumula- 
tion of wealth can escape this questioning nor face 
it without having his equanimity considerably dis- 
turbed. 

Certainly a profound transformation is taking 
place. The moral climate is changing. Our ideals 



16 Social Service Series 

and standards of appreciation are vmdergoing a radi- 
cal criticism and extensive reconstruction. With in- 
creasingly clear and comprehensive intelligence the 
question is being pressed : Is there not something 
fundamentally wrong both as to our methods and 
our motives of accumulating wealth ? The motives, 
as we have seen, are not in themselves wrong. It 
is not wrong to seek self-expression in creative ac- 
tivity ; nor to desire independence and competency 
for one's self and one's family ; nor to obtain power 
to influence the lives of one's fellow men ; nor to 
achieve distinction both for one's self and one's 
family. But the question will not down : Can these 
proper and potent incentives, to action be called into 
play in the economic sphere only by the prospect or 
hope of piling up great individual fortunes, which 
are secured so largely by the appropriation of values 
created by others ? In a word, can economic activity 
and development be secured only at the cost of 
economic injustice and social injury? In the other 
great spheres of action we are not reduced to any 
such alternative ; why should it be so in the eco- 
nomic sphere ? 

But let us ask more pointedly the question : Does 
the individual accumulation of large fortunes as it 
goes on under present methods lead to injustice and 
injury? No one can look at the present situation 
with unprejudiced eyes and deny that social in- 
justice on a colossal scale has actually resulted. 
The fortunate and gifted few have piled up vast 



The Accumulation of Wealth 17 

accumulations, more than they and their famihes 
can possibly use in legitimate satisfaction of legiti- 
mate wants. The selected few among this limited 
number have amassed holdings which they cannot, 
by any human possibility, wisely administer either 
in their own interest or in the interest of the world. 
The man who is reputed to have amassed the largest 
individual fortune of this age has given a convincing 
and impressive demonstration of his consciousness 
of this fact, in offering to turn over a considerable 
portion of his stupendous wealth to be administered 
for the public good under a national charter. The 
only living American who can contest with him the 
financial primacy of this generation seems destined 
to die rich — rich beyond the dreams of avarice — de- 
spite his own declaration, no doubt honestly uttered, 
that it is a disgrace to- die rich, and- despite his mani- 
fold and lavish efforts to dispose of his wealth in 
ways helpful to the world. 

But these and other examples of benevolent rich 
men do not by any means indicate that all, or even 
a majority, of the extravagantly rich are striving to 
get rid of their accumulations and thus disburden 
their souls. Rather the process of accumulating 
goes on by leaps and bounds, and creates a problem, 
a menace, that stirs the nation from center to cir- 
cumference. The standards by which individual 
wealth is measured rise continually, and the scram- 
ble for it shows no abatement, but rather an in- 
creasing intensity of madness. Meantime, while 



t8 Social Service Series 

the situation of the unfortunate and ungifted many 
may be said to show some improvement, it is slight. 
Poverty, desperate and debihtating, shutting out the 
light of hope and chilling the springs of courage in 
the heart, still spreads its cold and dismal shadow 
over millions of men. In the midst of rapidly ris- 
ing standards of living and rapidly rising prices of 
the necessaries of life, the millions of laboring men 
must live and secure their families against beggary 
on an average of not more than five hundred dollars 
a year. By their side stand the thousands who have 
devoted themselves to ministering to the cultural 
needs of humanity; and who also must feed upon 
the crumbs that fall from the richly laden social 
table. 

This situation is made portentous by the fact 
that these same multitudes are coming to see what 
they have been slow to realize, that the great accu- 
mulations of wealth have been created in large part 
by themselves; that they have been enabled to en- 
joy only a portion, and a relatively small portion, of 
the values which they have created; that those 
values, created by their dull and uninspiring toil, 
have in large part gone to build those mountains of 
gold on the summits of which the rich sit so far 
above the reach of any ungratified want which mate- 
rial things could directly or indirectly satisfy. It is 
as vain as it is grotesquely foolish to deny that in- 
justice is writ large upon the open page of bur so- 
cial life to-day. 



The Accumulation of Wealth 19 

In view of the situation, along what line must 
we advance toward the solution of the difficulty? 
We should seek by all means in our power to pro- 
mote the application of the ethical principles of 
Jesus to economic methods. Attention has been 
called to the atmospheric change now going on in 
our ethical life. To intelligent observers of cur- 
rent events this is the most inspiring aspect of our 
social development in this generation. We should 
encourage this change until transforming public 
opinion crystallizes into the definite and imperative 
public conviction that honor and power must be 
based upon and measured by service, and service 
alone. Business men must learn in all seriousness 
and perfect good faith to consider their various 
forms of business activity as forms of public serv- 
ice. The men of ability who can organize and direct 
great enterprises must cease to demand and appro- 
priate for themselves the lion's share of the joint 
product of collective labor and seek rather through 
the regular channels of business to effect the largest 
possible diffusion of wealth. 

The business man has no more moral right, ac- 
cording to the Christian standard, to accumulate a 
great and disproportionate mass of wealth as a re- 
ward for his activity than a preacher or a teacher. 
The Christian law of service should apply to the 
man who puts into industrial channels his intelli- 
gence and energy, just as truly and as thoroughly 
as to the man who puts his intelligence and energy 



20 Social Service Series 

into preaching the gospel or into* teaching the young 
or into social uplift or into any other form of ac- 
tivity now recognized as distinctively public service. 
Why should this seem a strange doctrine ? It is the 
absence of this altruistic social spirit in business en- 
terprises — this setting aside of economic activity as 
a sphere in which the god Mammon alone has the 
right to reign — which has precipitated the crisis 
which so threateningly confronts our modern civili- 
zation. This menace can be averted only by sub- 
jecting all industrial activity to the Christian law of 
service. The business man must change his mental 
focus and aim not at the largest possible individual 
accumulation, but at securing for his employees the 
largest possible share in the products of industry 
and for the public the lowest prices for those prod- 
ucts, consistent with the continued operation of the 
business. 

In a word, the time must come, sooner or later, 
when the holding and controlling of capital by in- 
dividuals will be permitted only on the condition 
that it shall be held and administered strictly as a 
public trust. To deny that this is practicable is to 
deny that Christianity is practicable in the present 
industrial organization of society, and to affirm that 
we must move steadily and probably with increasing 
momentum tozvard a forcible industrial revolution. 



